1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

USMC General for SecDef?

Discussion in 'Vets and Friends' started by Salty, Nov 18, 2016.

Top Posters
  1. Salty

    Salty 20,000 Posts Club
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    38,982
    Likes Received:
    2,615
    Faith:
    Baptist
    #1 Salty, Nov 18, 2016
  2. Squire Robertsson

    Squire Robertsson Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2000
    Messages:
    15,371
    Likes Received:
    2,405
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Looks good to me. He's better than a member of the fighter mafia (AF), the surface warfare mafia (Navy), or the ranger mafia (Army).
     
    #2 Squire Robertsson, Nov 18, 2016
  3. Rob_BW

    Rob_BW Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2015
    Messages:
    4,320
    Likes Received:
    1,242
    Faith:
    Baptist
    He is not eligible until 2020. Title 10 says 7 years between service as an officer and appointment to SecDef, and he only retired in 2013.
     
    #3 Rob_BW, Nov 19, 2016
  4. Salty

    Salty 20,000 Posts Club
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    38,982
    Likes Received:
    2,615
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I believe the story stated that he can be give a waiver by Congress
     
    #4 Salty, Nov 19, 2016
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. Squire Robertsson

    Squire Robertsson Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2000
    Messages:
    15,371
    Likes Received:
    2,405
    Faith:
    Baptist
    #5 Squire Robertsson, Dec 3, 2016
  6. Rob_BW

    Rob_BW Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2015
    Messages:
    4,320
    Likes Received:
    1,242
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Lol, it just goes to show, in the military, there's a waiver for everything.

    As far as constitutionality, since the term secretary of defense doesn't appear in the Constitution, and since cabinet positions aren't outlined by name at all, I fail to see how Mattis' appointment could be labeled unconstitutional.
     
    #6 Rob_BW, Dec 3, 2016
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    52,013
    Likes Received:
    3,649
    Faith:
    Baptist
    He is exactly what we need. A far cry from the cupcake military leaders Obama has had.
     
    #7 Revmitchell, Dec 4, 2016
  8. StefanM

    StefanM Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,333
    Likes Received:
    210
    Faith:
    Baptist
    All it would take is a bill to sail through both the House and the Senate, which Trump would sign. Then the general could be nominated and confirmed.
     
    #8 StefanM, Dec 4, 2016
  9. TCassidy

    TCassidy Late-Administator Emeritus
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    20,080
    Likes Received:
    3,490
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The law requiring, at that time, 10 years since active service duty prior to being SoD was passed in 1949 and congress almost immediately waived the rule, allowing President Truman to name Army Gen. George Marshall to serve as defense secretary in 1950. The law was changed in 2008, reducing from ten to seven the number of years that a nominee must be retired from the military.

    So a precedent exists. However, at present Senate rules can require a 60% vote to confirm a candidate, but the Senate can rescind that requirement via a simple majority vote of 51 votes. As there are 51 Republicans in the 115th Senate, if Republicans stick together, the General's appointment is in the bag. :)
     
    #9 TCassidy, Dec 4, 2016
  10. Squire Robertsson

    Squire Robertsson Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2000
    Messages:
    15,371
    Likes Received:
    2,405
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Again the question the article I cited raised is "is the law itself Constitutional?" IOW, does the law impose a requirement beyond the Constitution's requirements? The Constitution requires the Senate's advice and consent. But, it leaves the initial appointment up to the POTUS.
     
    #10 Squire Robertsson, Dec 4, 2016
  11. StefanM

    StefanM Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,333
    Likes Received:
    210
    Faith:
    Baptist
    One could interpret the existing law as an extension of the Senate's responsibility in confirmation. Basically, it would be advice that they would not consent within those parameters.
     
    #11 StefanM, Dec 4, 2016
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Loading...